12 Sep 14
Originally posted by SuzianneYou just supported what I said. It was written by men, no deity inspired that or any other book of the bible.
No, come on, Einstein's equations themselves DO preclude time travel into the past. You should know this. Theories that supposedly allow it are just that, theories.
Also, on the Adam's rib thing: Do you really think that the average Hebrew of Moses' time could understand DNA, or its role in supplying a "blueprint" of man? Now say to him that G ...[text shortened]... nderstand. You only have to use some common sense. (Haha, ready for the meltdown to follow...)
12 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonhouseI bet you did not know this:
Actually, Big Al didn't proscribe time travel into the past, there are theories that may allow just that to happen. The problem for Big Al was the paradoxes it could entail, go back, off your granpa kind of thing.
I was just pointing out your garden thing was just a tale, not reality.
For instance, in that particular tale, your deity made the Earth and ...[text shortened]... years older than the Jewish version.
Doesn't that make you wonder about that, just a little?
Q: When the ribs grow back after surgery, do they actually form new rib bone and reconnect to the spine, and how long does it take for this to happen?
A: Yes, the ribs do grow back, forming a new rib. This takes approximately two to three months.
Q: Is the new growth as strong as the original rib?
A: The new rib, once it is completely healed, will be as strong as the original rib.
http://www.scoliosis.org/resources/medicalupdates/ribthoracoplasty.php
Originally posted by sonhouseDo scientists routinely offer up arguments from incredulity among themselves, or do they put a bit more effort into being (or at least appearing to be) reasonable among their peers?
So you believe in the garden of eden and this guy supposedly from the future,
HE'S nuts?
Seriously dude, anyone who believes in the possibility of multiple universes should probably not be so quick to judge the mental state of someone they don't happen to agree with... I'm just saying.
There's knowledge, and then there's wisdom... and although it's possible to have knowledge without wisdom, the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
13 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonhouseBut for some reason, this deity couldn't make a woman like it made the man, needing to have a template of a rib?
Actually, Big Al didn't proscribe time travel into the past, there are theories that may allow just that to happen. The problem for Big Al was the paradoxes it could entail, go back, off your granpa kind of thing.
I was just pointing out your garden thing was just a tale, not reality.
For instance, in that particular tale, your deity made the Earth and ...[text shortened]... years older than the Jewish version.
Doesn't that make you wonder about that, just a little?
Do you do everything you can do just because you can do it?
I think you know men don't have one less rib than women, right?
Even ancient people from thousands of years ago (without any knowledge of science) knew that losing a body part didn't mean your offspring would be missing the same corresponding part.
You can avoid looking foolish if you simply take some time to think before responding.
13 Sep 14
Originally posted by lemon limeYeah, well, I thought that guy was a little off his nut (the caller). Those are the perils of doing a radio show heard across the country. As far as Stan Deyo's website is concerned, there may be good info there, it's just hard to find amid all the self-promotion going on there.
I was suffering through a night of insomnia and just happened to catch a part of that broadcast. But a call was taken (during the interview I think) from a guy claiming to be from the future. What was that all about? I listened for a minute or two and then turned the radio off.
The guy talking about Eden seemed to be making some sense. I don't know how ...[text shortened]... on to something else, or was that call supposed to be relevant to what the Eden guy was saying?
25 Sep 14
2 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseActually, Big Al didn't proscribe time travel into the past, there are theories that may allow just that to happen. The problem for Big Al was the paradoxes it could entail, go back, off your granpa kind of thing.
Actually, Big Al didn't proscribe time travel into the past, there are theories that may allow just that to happen. The problem for Big Al was the paradoxes it could entail, go back, off your granpa kind of thing.
I was just pointing out your garden thing was just a tale, not reality.
For instance, in that particular tale, your deity made the Earth and ...[text shortened]... years older than the Jewish version.
Doesn't that make you wonder about that, just a little?
Time is a continual progression of cause and effect events. Event 'A' causes event 'B', 'B' is the cause of 'C' and so forth. This chain of cause and effect events is a one way street, so what theory is able to show how it's possible for someone to jump backwards in time?
Time itself cannot be reversed and everything made to go backwards, so someone would literally need to leave the chain (get off the escalator) and then cause themselves to move in the other direction, against the flow of time. Moving against the flow of time means you would literally need to be able to circumvent, or at least not be affected by, the existence of everything thing else in the universe. So how does one effectively become an exception to a rule when (according to modern physics) there is no room for exceptions?
Not only that, but the inevitability of paradoxes can kill any time travel theory. Killing your grandpa before he started having children would effectively negate your future existence, which means you couldn't have gone back in time to kill him... because then you wouldn't exist later on down the timeline chain of cause and effect events, and if you didn't exist then your grandpa couldn't have died at your hands because he couldn't have, because you didn't exist, but if he didn't die then you could have existed to go back in time, but if you did then you would not because if you did exist and then did something to negate your eventual existence, then, uh....
...then it means you didn't do it because you couldn't have done it even if you went back in time, but if you did go back in time then you would probably have to live out your existence from some point in time before you started to exist, which means... oh man, my brain is starting to hurt. I need an aspirin and I need it yesterday!
25 Sep 14
Originally posted by lemon limeYou never met a weeping angel.
[b]Actually, Big Al didn't proscribe time travel into the past, there are theories that may allow just that to happen. The problem for Big Al was the paradoxes it could entail, go back, off your granpa kind of thing.
Time is a continual progression of cause and effect events. Event 'A' causes event 'B', 'B' is the cause of 'C' and so forth. This ch ...[text shortened]... which means... oh man, my brain is starting to hurt. I need an aspirin and I need it yesterday![/b]
Kelly
05 Oct 14
1 edit
Originally posted by lemon limeBut the actions that you take if/when you go back in time define the now current present. It's like that 'quantum eraser' you were talking about. There is no paradox, really. If you did go back in time and killed your grandfather and then went forward to your heretofore 'present' time, you would have never existed in that timeline. You would not 'cease to exist' because you still exist in 'your' timeline. It becomes a different timeline, in a quantum effect kind of way. And I can only assume 'Big Al' knew this. Therefore the problem with reverse time travel is not a 'paradox' problem, but a mathematical one.
[b]Actually, Big Al didn't proscribe time travel into the past, there are theories that may allow just that to happen. The problem for Big Al was the paradoxes it could entail, go back, off your granpa kind of thing.
Time is a continual progression of cause and effect events. Event 'A' causes event 'B', 'B' is the cause of 'C' and so forth. This ch ...[text shortened]... which means... oh man, my brain is starting to hurt. I need an aspirin and I need it yesterday![/b]
05 Oct 14
Originally posted by SuzianneThat was my take on it. If there was this quantum law that prevents you from killing your grampa, at what point in time would you have disappeared? The moment you hit the GO button on the time machine, if your MO was to specifically off gramps? Later, when Gramps actually dies?
But the actions that you take if/when you go back in time define the now current present. It's like that 'quantum eraser' you were talking about. There is no paradox, really. If you did go back in time and killed your grandfather and then went forward to your heretofore 'present' time, you would have never existed in that timeline. You would not ...[text shortened]... erefore the problem with reverse time travel is not a 'paradox' problem, but a mathematical one.
That kind of interaction didn't seem right to me. It seemed to me like you said, there would be an alternate time line where you are alive but the entire line after gramps died not existing at all.
Even that has problems though. Say grampa was the last person in his genetic line, or next to, then YOU are the last one of those genes.
So you off gramps, a new timeline starts up and you go to that timeline, then for some reason or other your DNA gets analyzed. They find no match for the entire human race except say 30 generations earlier.
That alone would be an enigma. The genetic scientists would be left scratching their heads trying to figure out where you came from.